COWBOY-----COWBOY-----HOSTAGE (More about this target below)-----COWBOY

The hostage target was your basic black squared off IDPA type target, with a small plate painted orange that would flip from one side of the hostage head to the other when hit.

Stage instructions over rode normal scoring and were basically this -

With pistols shoot a continuous Nevada sweep on the cowboys and orange target. Hitting the hostage (I think his name was Stan) will not be scored a miss, but will be a 5 second procedural. I told you stage instructions over rode normal scoring, right? And we were reminded that you can only get one procedural per stage. Missing both the orange target and Stan would obviously be a miss.

In defense of the stage writer, this is not exactly how it was initially written, it was changed by the match director.

So, I am third shooter, I had a terrible time hitting the orange target on the previous stage, so I figure to game the stage. I shoot the sweep hitting Stan instead of even making an attempt on the orange target. I do this knowing I can only get one P and to avoid two misses. (The sweep as written would have you shooting the orange target three times, you get one special 5 second P, so the savings is two misses, assuming I would have tried and missed if I had followed instructions, I also probably saved a few more seconds that I would have spent slowing down to take careful aim.

It took them 5 minutes to figure out how many misses I had. I have no idea if they got it right or not, truth is, I don't care.

Did I deserve an SOG for how I shot the stage?

At any match other than what this was, a monthly as a non SASS club with some what relaxed standards, I say YES I DO. And I would not have blamed them if I'd gotten one there.

I don't know why I decided to push it today, maybe this thread had me stirred up to stir the pot or something. I can say it was FUNNY.

Link to post

Share on other sites

So you are calling me out, Lone Dog? A closet dumper, you say? Time for me to come out of the closet. I have DUMPED after earning a P. There, I admitted it. As a TO, I have told shooters, "You've earned a P, just shoot it as fast as you can now" or something to that effect. I've NEVER seen a shooter dump the rest of the stage after earning a P, just that particular weapon.

Oh, and I earned a P today. First time in I don't know how long. Engaged shotgun targets out-of-order. Too bad it was the last weapon. I might have been tempted to tempt fate just to see what the posse would do if I dumped everything after that.

Now for the rulebook definition of "Spirit of the Game Penalty." I think everyone is overlooking the very critical statement in the definition. Yes, Lone Dog, it is archaic, but it states a SOG is for a NON-SHOOTING action or event. Everyone should go back to Grizzly Dave's post two up and re-read the SOG definition. Then tell me how a SOG penalty applies to anything we've spent this many pages discussing.

Thank you. I'm glad I'm out of the closet now. And I wasn't even the one who wore the skirt (kilt) today!

Share on other sites

Now for the rulebook definition of "Spirit of the Game Penalty." I think everyone is overlooking the very critical statement in the definition. Yes, Lone Dog, it is archaic, but it states a SOG is for a NON-SHOOTING action or event. Everyone should go back to Grizzly Dave's post two up and re-read the SOG definition. Then tell me how a SOG penalty applies to anything we've spent this many pages discussing.

...

FWIW, failure to engage/Spirit of the Game are used pretty much interchangeably in common SASS usage, such as in this thread.

Share on other sites

You are a wise man. Also, the TGs voted at the 2010 Summit further consolodate FTE and SOG.

Following are my notes.

• Currently FTE and SOG are somewhat separated although the corresponding penalty is the same, thirty seconds.

• One of the TGs said that folks are confused by the distinction, with FTE referring to non-shooting activities. He recommended that the words Failure to Engage be dropped and the term Spirit of the Game be used for both types of actions.

• A vote indicated that the TGs agreed. The ROC will work on the wording change.

Link to post

Share on other sites

FWIW, failure to engage/Spirit of the Game are used pretty much interchangeably in common SASS usage, such as in this thread.

You are correct, FWIW, but that does not make it correct usage. See quote, below, from SASS Shooter's Handbook, p. 1:

A “spirit of the game” infraction occurs when a competitor willfully or intentionally

disregards the stage instructions in order to obtain a competitive advantage (i.e., taking the

penalty would result in a lower score or faster time than following the instructions) and is not

assessed simply because a competitor “makes a mistake.” In such a case, in addition to any

penalties for misses, a 30-second failure to engage/Spirit of the Game penalty is assessed.

Shooting ammunition that does not meet the power factor or minimum velocity is also a

“spirit of the game” infraction. Two “spirit of the game” penalties within a match will result

in a Match Disqualification.

My point is this: a)according to MY interpretation of the rules, there is a Spirit of the Game Penalty, stated above, AND a Failure to Engage Penalty. Both are 30-second penalties. SOG is for shooting activities. FTE is for non-shooting activities. Note in the quote above it says "in addition to any penalties for misses, a 30-second ...." It does NOT say "in addition to any penalties for misses and procedurals,...."

So, to me, SOG penalty supercedes a Procedural penalty and replaces it. One does not get a P and a SOG.

You are correct, FWIW, but that does not make it correct usage. See quote, below, from SASS Shooter's Handbook, p. 1:

A “spirit of the game” infraction occurs when a competitor willfully or intentionally

disregards the stage instructions in order to obtain a competitive advantage (i.e., taking the

penalty would result in a lower score or faster time than following the instructions) and is not

assessed simply because a competitor “makes a mistake.” In such a case, in addition to any

penalties for misses, a 30-second failure to engage/Spirit of the Game penalty is assessed.

Shooting ammunition that does not meet the power factor or minimum velocity is also a

“spirit of the game” infraction. Two “spirit of the game” penalties within a match will result

in a Match Disqualification.

My point is this: a)according to MY interpretation of the rules, there is a Spirit of the Game Penalty, stated above, AND a Failure to Engage Penalty. Both are 30-second penalties. SOG is for shooting activities. FTE is for non-shooting activities. Note in the quote above it says "in addition to any penalties for misses, a 30-second ...." It does NOT say "in addition to any penalties for misses and procedurals,...."

So, to me, SOG penalty supercedes a Procedural penalty and replaces it. One does not get a P and a SOG.

I said that about 2 pages ago skip the "P" and just give a SOG..

If the shooter wants to try and get back on track.. he can and just get a "P"

If he doesn't want to get back somewhat on track.. and just dumps on a target SOG

I would say then if the P was committed intentionally as part of the willful act then yes the SOG would cover it all using your logic. Plus any misses.

But, if the P was not intentional, and after that had been earned, the shooter earned an SOG that both would be appropriate, along with any misses.

Interesting, I hadn't looked at it from quite that direction. thanks.

Grizz

But the rules don't say that. It says, "in addition to any penalty for misses...." The P is superceded by the SOG. So, if a TO feels a SOG penalty is appropriate, the shooter gets the 30-second penalty, not 10 + 30.

Would now be interesting to get some input from Palewolf or others from the RO Committee.

I read that to mean that while you are committing an SOG (for example a dump) you can still accrue misses.

But if you had somehow managed to find a way to commit an SOG without first earning a P, then you could not actually earn a P as well while doing it. I can't come up with a definitive example for that though.

I could be wrong, it's happened before, only once, but who knows I'm sure glad these things don't come up hardly at all in real life, it would get confusing real fast!

I read that to mean that while you are committing an SOG (for example a dump) you can still accrue misses.

But if you had somehow managed to find a way to commit an SOG without first earning a P, then you could not actually earn a P as well while doing it. I can't come up with a definitive example for that though.

I could be wrong, it's happened before, only once, but who knows I'm sure glad these things don't come up hardly at all in real life, it would get confusing real fast!

Riddle me this...

Two scenarios:

Shooter A "willfully and intentionally" does not shoot the stage as directed. He has one miss. You would award Shooter A a miss and a SOG, for a total of 35 seconds in penalties.

Shooter B has a brain fade, so earns a P. In the process of finishing the stage he has one miss AND he dumps all of his remaining rounds from the weapon in which he earned the P. You would award him a miss, a P and a SOG for a total of 45 seconds in penalties.

I submit to you that this course of action defies common sense. The "willful" shooter (Shooter A) should be penalized more, or at least the same as, Shooter B, who just made a mistake and tried to hurry up to make up some time.

But the rules don't say that. It says, "in addition to any penalty for misses...." The P is superceded by the SOG. So, if a TO feels a SOG penalty is appropriate, the shooter gets the 30-second penalty, not 10 + 30.

Would now be interesting to get some input from Palewolf or others from the RO Committee.

One reason procedurals aren't mentioned in the FTE/SOG penalty section is that it IS possible to get the 30-second penalty WITHOUT committing a procedural error.

The current FTE definition (RO1 p.3) refers to non-shooting situations.

The SOG for ammo that doesn't meet the MinVel/PF standards would also be a "non-P" situation.

If the shooter commits a procedural, then proceeds to engage the rest of the stage in a manner that fulfills the "Spirit of the Game" penalty criteria, s/he would get the SOG IN ADDITION to any miss OR PROCEDURAL penalties.

As noted previously (in one or more threads on this subject), the ONE time I assessed a "Spirit of the Game" penalty the shooter committed a "P" (engaged targets out of order); then proceeded to compound the situation with TWO more "P" violations (out of category + out of order/DUMP)...knowing that no additional "P"s could be assessed...in an attempt to offset the 10-second penalty for the original "P".

Share on other sites

Would now be interesting to get some input from Palewolf or others from the RO Committee.

BJT quoted Snakebite via Allie Mo in the first post of this thread. I don't understand exactly how it is an "official" ruling as I have looked at Snakebite's posts and it is not showing there.

I'm thinking that beyond this being a good debate contest, it's serving no good purpose. There's more chance of getting a speeding ticket for going 71 in a 70 MPH zone than there is someone passing out a SOG for dumping the gun they're shooting when they get a P. It doesn't mean it's not against the law, it just means that most would realize that it would serve no purpose.

Edit: Palewolf posted while I was typing. As suspected, it's against the law.

Shooter A "willfully and intentionally" does not shoot the stage as directed. He has one miss. You would award Shooter A a miss and a SOG, for a total of 35 seconds in penalties.

Shooter B has a brain fade, so earns a P. In the process of finishing the stage he has one miss AND he dumps all of his remaining rounds from the weapon in which he earned the P. You would award him a miss, a P and a SOG for a total of 45 seconds in penalties.

I submit to you that this course of action defies common sense. The "willful" shooter (Shooter A) should be penalized more, or at least the same as, Shooter B, who just made a mistake and tried to hurry up to make up some time.

Shooter A: does it willfully and intentioanally..

Your sayin', Award Shooter A, a SOG (30 seconds) and 1 miss.. (5 seconds)... for a total of 35 seconds..

Shooter B: has a brain fade... so he earns a P.. (he apparently shot targets out of order or sequence to earn the P)

Why? didn't shooter A earn a P... he shot out of order... so shooter A should also get the P...

My thoughts...

Shooter A.. shot out of order and did it willfully and intentionally .. SOG plus all misses..

Shooter B.. Brain Fade... shot it out of order mistakenly.. and dumped... SOG plus all misses..

Ol' Shooter C... Has a brain fade.. gets his double tap sweep out of order.. (as OP originally stated.)

by single tapping til target 4 and goes Oh Heck.. then dumps... SOG plus all misses..

But if this Ol' Shooter C.. after sayin' Oh Heck.. starts double tappin' the targets til his gun is empty... He gets a "P" only plus any misses incurred.... NO SOG..

Rance

My thinkin' only

Is the horse dead yet??

Yikes... Pale Wolf came aboard.. Always welcome his input..

Sorry fer steppin' on yer toes.. but I was typin same time you and Buck was

Link to post

Share on other sites

BJT quoted Snakebite via Allie Mo in the first post of this thread. I don't understand exactly how it is an "official" ruling as I have looked at Snakebite's posts and it is not showing there.

I'm thinking that beyond this being a good debate contest, it's serving no good purpose. There's more chance of getting a speeding ticket for going 71 in a 70 MPH zone than there is someone passing out a SOG for dumping the gun they're shooting when they get a P. It doesn't mean it's not against the law, it just means that most would realize that it would serve no purpose.

Edit: Palewolf posted while I was typing. As suspected, it's against the law.

Link to post

Share on other sites

Palewolf Brunelle has spoken. In my experience his opinion has virtually always been that of the SASS Ownership.

I,for one, would appreciate a reference to the printed rules in support of his assertion, because I do not see it. It is not that I challenge the authority to make the rule work as it has been described, I simply would like to see the rule reflect its actual intended application.